In Reply to: RE: Better duck under that desk; posted by Ryelands on August 1, 2009 at 10:13:02:
I'm not saying the high-res people were deluding themselves. That's not the point. The point is that Kuchner's study say absolutely nothing on the subject. I'm not sure where you get the faulty kit, bad sampling procedures, etc. There is nothing in the report that would lead to that conclusion. And you can, of course, choose to accept the "fine work" if you choose. It will, no doubt, be very useful the next time your setting up a system based on misaligned ribbons to play back your favorite square waves. It won't tell you much about the mysteries of music reproduction, though.
Audiophiles confuse me. "Trust your ears," they say. "Measurements aren't important." Until, of course, the most obscure and loosely relevant measurements appear to support their pre-conceived notions.
P
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 08/1/0920:01:03 08/1/09 (27)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 06:00:31 08/2/09 (26)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 06:48:18 08/2/09 (25)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 07:16:17 08/2/09 (24)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:22:52 08/2/09 (23)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 01:05:50 08/3/09 (22)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 04:06:20 08/3/09 (21)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 04:40:30 08/3/09 (20)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:08:53 08/3/09 (19)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 07:56:07 08/3/09 (18)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 12:09:11 08/3/09 (17)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 14:42:51 08/3/09 (16)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:27:33 08/3/09 (15)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 19:46:06 08/3/09 (14)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:24:51 08/4/09 (0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 02:55:41 08/4/09 (12)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Tony Lauck 17:29:58 08/5/09 (0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:05:49 08/4/09 (7)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 19:12:49 08/5/09 (4)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 19:46:58 08/5/09 (3)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 20:00:35 08/5/09 (2)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 03:56:22 08/6/09 (1)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 07:50:41 08/6/09 (0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Tony Lauck 17:40:32 08/5/09 (1)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 19:17:37 08/5/09 (0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 04:13:36 08/4/09 (2)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 07:59:20 08/5/09 (1)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 23:19:23 08/5/09 (0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 06:26:29 08/10/09 (0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 06:50:25 08/10/09 (0)